Why is Pajamas Media assuming the people in the photographs are attempting to pass as protesters? They are making their counter-protest transparent and charmingly funny. Calling them stupid is... stupid.

It reminds me of when AL Sharpton was protesting Freddie's Fashion Mart which had displaced long time record store. He fumed "These people don't belong here...they come in and take over our neighborhood...damn antelopers."

Althouse: "They are making their counter-protest transparent and charmingly funny. Calling them stupid is... stupid."

But you'll note that all of these counter-protest signs simply call the tea party people stupid: "I know nothing about what I'm protesting", misspellings, etc.

So the counter-protesters calling their adversaries stupid is charming; but Pajamas Media's calling these counterprotesters stupid is foolish. Why's that? Is there some other level of meaning behind the "...skool..." and "...nukular..." signs that I'm missing?

You know what else is charming? That muslim extremist holding up the sign that read "Freedom Go to Hell". I'd say these charming counter-protesters have quite a bit in common with that guy. They're counter-protesting against a demonstration in favor of a return to a constitutional republic and more responsible fiscal policy. That makes them pretty fucking stupid in my book. They might as well have "tax me to within an inch of my life and bankrupt my nation" tattooed on their asses.

Yeah, i agree that some of the infiltration is honest. i mean i remember protest warrior a few years ago. they would sneak into leftist anti-war rallies, with signs saying stuff like, "besides ending slavery, stopping the holocaust, liberating europe and america, what good has war ever done for us?"

And i think i passed on to this forum where when i left the tea party a few weeks back, as we headed to the metro one joker stood at the entrance with a sign saying, "stop big government transportation." or something to that effect, obviously ribbing those of us who chose public transportation to get to the rally. i mean there is an element of dishonesty, but once the signs go up, everyone knows what it really is.

That is to be differentiated between a sign holder who pretends to actually share their views and they lies about what their views are. Some of the infiltrators i have seen fit that description, but some of them are more like those protest warrior pranksters, and its an important distinction. one is tryign to argue with you on full snark, and one is trying to lie to everyone about you.

New Ham, I think we've talked to you before about the violent rhetoric. Somewhat counterproductive.

Although I did see a video of some idiot in some sort of half-ass Nazi t-shirt that I might have been willing to pop in the nose. That's the downside to participating in such a false-flag operation: Who's going to criticize the person who smacks around some asshole with a Nazi t-shirt or a racist sign? Whether he's a false-flag liberal or some sort of uber-right nut, he's earned it.

"i remember protest warrior a few years ago. they would sneak into leftist anti-war rallies, with signs saying stuff like, "besides ending slavery, stopping the holocaust, liberating europe and america, what good has war ever done for us?""

Did they ever hold up a sign saying: "I hate n*ggers."

Because that's what these Democrat Party plants are doing. They're holding up signs designed and written to produce the impression for the media that members of the Tea Party are racists or idiots or uninformed.

Take their pictures. Get in their faces. Fucking punch them twice as hard.

Get their license plate numbers.

Run them out of our protests.

Call over a cop and ask that the agent provocateur be removed from the for his own safety or there could be trouble.

Follow them back to Democrat Party headquarters and get video of them meeting with their friends.

It's not hard to figure out what to do to these fucking assholes.

If they persist, find a group of folks and surround them with your signs and get in their fucking faces and punch them twice as hard ... just like they have been ordered by their President to do to us.

Except these counter-protesters pictured at this article aren't making an argument, other than that the other side is stupid. That's not really an argument, it's an ad hominem attack. That's what passes for an argument on a kindergarten playground.

We had a small group (4, I think, with 2 actually holding signs and speaking, and the others just milling about nearby- even though they had more signs), but they were clearly counterprotesting (signs: "tax the rich" "healthcare, not wealthcare", "troops home now"). I called them counterprotesters, not infiltrators. I agree with AA that the article here is off base.

It was, however, absolutely hilarious to watch the kickass old veterans tell what's what every few minutes.

"Why is Pajamas Media assuming the people in the photographs are attempting to pass as protesters?"

A), it's a sexier story

b), that's what we were most afraid of. We don't really mind people honestly saying 'We don't agree with Tea Partiers' or 'Tea Party = Nazis' (I saw that sign) nearly as much as we would mind someone pretending to be one of us to undermine us.

I think that's clear. PJM is still reporting on the documented efforts to infiltrate and kinda not worried about how these protesters weren't quite as bad and might even be charming to some cruel people.

New Ham: "George Washington didn't urge his fellow Americans to be fucking civil and pay their tea tax."

Nor did Washington announce his violent intentions in great detail in a public forum, where it could be used as fodder for the other side's propaganda. By the time he announced his intentions, he was ready to make war.

I don't think we're quite there yet; not by any stretch of the imagination. And that makes your statements, while they might be cathartic, counterproductive; and it's what leads some commenters here to wonder whose side you're actually on.

And re. fucking myself: Tried it, and damn it all, anatomically impossible. (We're not all built like Jesus, after all).

I dont have any problems with counter protesters-its the nature of free speech. I do have a problem with agents provacteur, on whatever side, and if that is the issue, the tea party folks seem to have that under control.

The question is, I think, will the tea partiers be able to keep the pressure on thru the summer and into the fall elections. Time will tell.

@Pastafarian, I'm assuming that NewHam is referring to the Whiskey Rebellion. There was a tax revolt in Western Pennsylvania and George Washington's response was to call out the troops and personally take command in the field.

Plus almost all of our liberals here at Althouse could do better, even garage when he's not being lazy.

Honestly to be charming don't you have to be sort of interesting?

Althouse is too easily amused.

That explains the titus fascination, that and how Althouse loves to look at the worm...

btw-after observing Althouse and some other self described artists here-I think Modern art is really appreciated by those that really can't draw. Art for the failures at art-kind of like the Democrats are for those that can't...never mind.

New Ham does not know what an agent provcateur is. It is not someone obviously not part of the group, obviously in opposition to the group's philosophy and saying so out loud. An agent provocateur is someone, typically a law enforcement agent, who has carefully infiltrated the group, so assiduously aping the clothing, rhetoric and attitudes of the group that he or she is taken by all in the group as one of their own. The agent provocateur then uses this position of acceptance and trust to instigate the group into carrying out acts they might not have done otherwise, acts that are customarily illegal, to serve as pretexts for the authorities to make arrests of the group members. In the case of an agent provocateur who is not a law enforcement agent--if there ever has been such a case--I suppose the intent would be to instigate acts by the group which would have a negative impact and thus serve to discredit the group or make it appear ridiculous or unserious.

I think New Ham may himself by attempting to be an agent provocateur, but his aping of radical right wing rhetorical fury is so heavy handed that he comes off as merely trying too hard...or someone with personal issues in need of working out.

I think New Ham may himself by attempting to be an agent provocateur, but his aping of radical right wing rhetorical fury is so heavy handed that he comes off as merely trying too hard...or someone with personal issues in need of working out.

Earthquakes worldwide, massive volcanic eruption in Iceland and now Robert Cook makes his first sensible comment.

If you absolutely must insist on cruel neutrality, then yeah, you're going to force yourself to give points for style to really lame stuff.

If Type O Negative ran against the Rolling Stones, a Cruel Neutral observer would wind up being pretty confused and strange.

It's just a plain fact that the Tea Party opponents yesterday were generally pretty lame and totally ineffective. Charming? I saw a couple examples out of thousands, filtered by the internet. But generally, PJM's pointing out lameness that did not work.

New Ham is a proud member of the "101st fighting keyboardists". The same group the cheered on Iraq while he was in the safety of his parent's basement. Real men died to support his virtual soldierdom. New Ham - how does it feel to be a scum-sucking asshole?

There's no chance of a riot breaking out at a Tea Party because some dirty hippies try to be edgy.

If you went to a few Tea Parties, you'd realize they aren't right wing versions of Anti-war or G8 protests.

We aren't going to kneecap you or kill you. We're going to vote and complain before we vote. It's not that big a deal, really. Except that it's a substantial movement and appears to have overwhelmed several swing states, perhaps deliberately.

It's interesting to see how the Tea Party has harnessed grass roots but kinda has some signs that it's more sophisticated and also totally unsophisticated.

a very clever deal, if in fact someone has managed to strategize a way to make this mass of random disagreeing people change the political landscape in the wake of Bush and TARP.

Anyway, we aren't going to kill you, and New Ham is not one of us. If he said that at a protest, he would be escorted out politely, or someone would hold a sign up next to him pointing out that he's a total fake.

Let's put it like this. If Obama tries to ignore the Constitution and run for a 3rd term and the Congress/SCOTUS let him get away with it then it's time for a Civil War. Until that happens, just calm down teabaggers.

Let's put it like this. If Obama tries to ignore the Constitution and run for a 3rd term and the Congress/SCOTUS let him get away with it then it's time for a Civil War. Until that happens, just calm down teabaggers."

Alex, others like him: you need to stop looking in your mouth for my balls, and start looking for where you lost your own, if you're that afraid of the Tea Party.

LOL, as if the Tea Party is suggesting anything other than voting you idiots out of power.

And as if we aren't winning on the issues and with the people. Why would be need a civil war? Look at a state by state poll.

Do you see how the swing states, other than NM, are red? How Obama's support loss is concentrated in swing states? Obama can't fool these democrats and independents twice. If anything, the GOP is more worried about Obama not being the Dem's nominee in 2012.

Why in the world would we want a civil war when we are winning the vote?

The only people bringing up civil wars are kooks like Alex. It's possible there's a kook in the Tea PArty contemplating this, but so far, every single one I've seen turns out to be a lefty.

Lefties wetting their pants like Alex begging the Tea Party to not overthrow the government violently need to relax, read the news, and realize we're winning so powerfully that we would never need to resort to violence like Bill Ayers or that democrat who tried to blow up the GOP convention.

Alex, others like him: you need to stop looking in your mouth for my balls, and start looking for where you lost your own, if you're that afraid of the Tea Party.

I think it was Instapundit linked to some photos of a fellow with a poster with a noose on it. I don't recall what it said but I did very much get a chuckle about the pre-prepared "I'm not with stupid" and "infiltrator" posters that surrounded and pointed at the guy.

The pictures at this link really aren't to anyone attempting a false flag operation. Maybe those college kids were just too decent of human beings to accept the excuse to justify and portray racist or violent messages. Some of the posters were sort of cute if vapid.

So the question seems to be, are they counter-demonstrators or are they Crashers who were too dumb to figure out how to do it right?

With the exception of the person who deliberately (one hopes!) misspelled "nuclear" these do look like counter-demonstrators. They also look like people who are still using the first national bank of Mom and Dad to get by financially, so it's not so clear that they even get the point of the Tea Party.

Did they ever hold up a sign saying: "I hate n*ggers."Because that's what these Democrat Party plants are doing.

I didn't see any of that in Boston. The small group of (possible) infiltrators I saw (the Ayn Rand crowd) were college age kids with big smiles on their faces, acting silly. What adult in their right mind is going to physically attack a young person for acting like a silly kid?

I tend to agree that many of these college kids were snarky counter-protesters; not really infiltrators.

Will there eventually be infiltrators of the sort Robert Cook mentioned, who act aggressive in order to provoke violence? If so, there will likely be arrests (uniformed cops were paying close attention to the antics of the college kids), and the identity of infiltrators would likely be discovered.

But if in the process they are able to get enough "NewHam" types to follow their lead, ie) to attack counter-protesters or even other infiltrators, their efforts would be successful.

"Maybe those college kids were just too decent of human beings to accept the excuse to justify and portray racist or violent messages. Some of the posters were sort of cute if vapid.

Speech is a good thing."

Absolutely. I'm glad to see people who disagree with the Tea Party trying to get their point across in an upfront manner.

A lot of the posters fail to do that, like "whaaargbl whaaargbl" ones I see repeated so often. It was funny the first time, but come up with something original. We do have a coherent argument, even if you don't agree with it.

But so much better than the many documented examples of infiltration (And pointing to this as evidence there was no infiltration would be a pathetic strawman who gets his lunch money stolen by the superior men of straw).

But I have seen some arguments by the counter protesters that are legit. Even though I don't agree with some of these guys, I'm proud of them for not being jerks.

"Let's put it like this. If Obama tries to ignore the Constitution and run for a 3rd term and the Congress/SCOTUS let him get away with it then it's time for a Civil War. Until that happens, just calm down teabaggers."

At the Tea Party rally in New York City last night, sure enough, I saw a group of infiltrators with their signs. I talked to them and they freely admitted to what they were doing. Their defense was, "I'm an American." Funny how they don't mind wrapping themselves in the flag when it suits them.

Anyway, one of the signs said, "Make War on Government." So, you see, they need to put words in our mouths so they have something to argue against, because they can't find an argument with what we actually say.

TheThinMan - you can't deny that there is an anarchist element among the teabaggers.

4/16/10 1:57 PM"

booga booga booga. The Tea PArty is going to kill you and do all kinds of terrible things and should be shut down! They are super scary! They want to take over the government and then !!!! Leave you ALONE!!!!! HELP ME MOMMY!

No, dude, we're totally destroying you in the polls and there's no reason to go Ayers or radical liberal violent crazy.

Perhaps you're projecting? It sure sounds like it. You liberals are the only ones bringing up overthrowing the government the Tea Party is taking over in November.

Some of these lefties keep insisting on being intimidated by Tea Partiers who have no interest in hurting or scaring them. We want you to join us, even if you're lefty on many other issues.

These crazy folks keep staining the floor yellow and getting on their knees and begging us not to overthrow a democratic system we are electorally effective in. Stop trying to suck my balls. I do not want to actually teabag you sissies.

Get on your feet, clean up your drawers, and join the Tea Party movement for a balanced budget and sustainable spending. Condemn the Bush era's spending and Obama's taking it to the next level. Lots and lots of democrats are doing this, and they don't have to worry about the last time I took a shower.

Pastafarian at 4/16 11:00 AM wins the thread with his spot-on analysis of the Professor's inexplicable and logically absurd claim that calling these people stupid is stupid.

I also wonder what's charmingly funny about them. They are neither charming nor funny.

BUT, Althouse is right that these people are not infiltrators, they are merely counter-protesters. The PJM essay assumes that the infiltrator folks own the counter-protest movement much the same way that the regular media assume [insert embarrassing person here] owns the Tea Party movement.

Lots of media need to stop assuming that informal groups have formal membership, command structures and total control over everyone on their side of the aisle.

"But I have seen some arguments by the counter protesters that are legit. Even though I don't agree with some of these guys, I'm proud of them for not being jerks."

I specifically thanked our counterprotesters; I said that I don't agree with you, but I'm glad you're here, being basically polite, and not misrepresenting anything. The guy looked at me like I was made of garbage, but managed a "thank you."

I know that sometimes they are doing the true false flag thing, where they want you to think they are actually tea partiers. The "I hate n---s" example describes more than a few of them and obviously that is underhanded and wrong.

But i have also seen pictures of supposed infiltrators who were doing something more like that protest warrior thing. And alot of outlets are mixing the two together. That's all i am saying.

I have only recently gotten over my sunburn from protesting at the capital, against Obamacare. i am on the side of the tea partiers, but fair is fair.

Um, Penny, I don't think there's ever been much doubt that the TEA party movement stands for reducing the size and scope of government back towards its Constitutionally enumerated powers, thereby restoring liberty and reducing the tax burden on its citizens. Hence: Taxed Enough Already. But if you really have been oblivious to a couple years of people saying that (or gullibly getting all your "news" from the MSM's attempt to paint the movement as militant, ignorant, or racist) you can start catching up here.

The tea parties are getting a little easier to mock though. Even Obama is doing it.

Yeah, he really has his finger on the pulse of the nation.

Aside from being a douchey, non-presidential thing to do, Obama decides to mock tea partiers, just as polls show support for them continues to grow, and more people are deciding to attend rallies. Another example of his brilliance I guess.

Someone should make a video putting together all the times O has sneered at his opposition. I can't recall another President being so openly derisive towards average Americans.

It reveals how out of touch he is to the fears of average Americans; the fear that the record deficits will bring crippling taxation. Their fear amuses him. He uses it as a punch line to entertain his supporters.

David's comment gives me the most hope. He says Obama is mocking the Tea Partiers and implies others on the left are following suit. I sincerely hope that is the case and were I not an atheist I would even pray for it. It will make it all the easier to defeat Obama's minions in November. They are telling each other jokes and fairy tales to calm themselves.

Having watched how the Tea Partiers protest vs. the typical leftist protest it is pretty easy to see the average IQ and all around decency of the crowd is higher on the right. They don't get arrested. They don't leave messes to be cleaned up by people on the lower end of the economic scale because they appreciate the value of work. They don't need to be told what to do or to have signs manufactured for them. They don't need to be organized by a central body. They out the infiltrators and are civil to the counter protesters.

In other words they are adults.

That is the scariest thing about all of this. The nicest, most decent people in the country are the ones who are angry now. The ones who make the country work and who produce more than they take are angry. The ones who do NOT protest over every little thing and who suffer great hardships quietly have finally had enough of always losing out to the loudmouths with their hands out who think they are entitled to something because they have mass and take up space.

It has to be a community organizers nightmare. Someone from that background has absolutely no skills to understand what is going on here. It is hard for the unprincipled and undisciplined to understand what it is to be a decent person. That is why they look for motivations in racism etc... They are looking for an angle that is being played because that is how they do things.

Calypso, the document referred to as "Contract From American" was released, um, YESTERDAY, according to Fox News, where they also said this..."The Contract from America may be an effort at organizing the party." Note the MAY BE...

That was really to my original point. Oh, and you take that tone with everyone who is a day behind on FOX News? Now THAT'S pretty funny!

I'd add one more scary thing, George: They vote, just about every single one of them. And unlike leftist protests, the nature of the Tea Party person makes it quite likely that millions who agree with them are not coming out, but will be in November. The only political thing they usually do is vote.

@ Penny: I was just trying to catch you up quickly with the new Contract site (versions of which have been floating around for about 6 months, btw). I'm certainly not chastising you for not being up on Fox...I don't watch it at all. Thought perhaps you were being a little disingenuous in your naivete' since the Tea Party has been talking about government restraint and taxation since 2006...

Apparently not exactly your circle of acquaintances? So I applaud your intellectual curiosity!

The use of agent provacteurs is a time-honored practice in democratically based politics from Britain to the USA to the elections in Weimar and Nazi Germany.Pat Buchanan talked of the fun of dirty tricks in the 60s. Democrats would have people with signs urging Nixon to start WWIII and Buchanan and his people would hire unwitting negroes to go to Democrat rallies and demand more welfare money, freeing all black political prisoners from US jails, and more "of the good stuff the Soviets have".

But now with technology not common 40 years ago in Pat's hardball heyday - it is a little harder to get away with - as agitators and infiltrators inevitably end up on videotape, security cameras, and cell phone streaming video.

Go to a tea party and shout ni**ger and high odds your face is on file and video showing your actions and your ID is uncovered. Embarassing if you are a Lefty teacher to see video of your ni**ger baiting in the hands of administrators and students and having to explain that away..."I was just PRETENDING to be a racist...see??"============

David -David said..

"Obama in Florida today says of the space program: "We are no longer racing against an adversary."

Will someone please brief him in the Chinese space program, in particular their plans to put a permanent base on the moon."

A manned moon base is nutty. If there was any national security value in us spending hundreds of billions to create such a base and a hundred billion or so to resupply it each year, or lunar resources we thought worth taking for America for economic/strategic reasons - the military had a 40-year time to make a case for it.

"A manned moon base is nutty. If there was any national security value in us spending hundreds of billions to create such a base..."

A moon base might be nutty but it also seems nutty to cede the moon to someone else. It's the ultimate high ground, isn't it?

But making a national security case involving anything to do with space is sort of hard to do while pushing for international agreements ensuring the non-militarization of space. Which I think is utterly stupid, but then I read Moon is a Harsh Mistress and am biased that way.

Still, satellites and orbital stations might be far more economical military geography. Let the moon go and stake out the Lagrange points, hm?

But we can't just "make a case" for that on national security grounds either. Same problem. Can't make any sort of case for any space efforts on national security grounds.

We can just hope someone is figuring out how to do it on the sly beyond a few Air Force brass.

A moon base might be nutty but it also seems nutty to cede the moon to someone else. It's the ultimate high ground, isn't it?

No, actually, it isn't. The surface of the moon is in a gravity well, albeit a less powerful one than Earth's. The "ultimate high ground" is either one of the Lagrange poinrts, or in orbit around the Earth (depending on what it is you want to do).

A base on the surface of the Moon would be (a) harder to maintain and (b) less strategically useful than a base in low earth orbit. Putting a base on the Moon would be even less useful than putting one on the bottom of the Marianas Trench.

the document referred to as "Contract From American" was released, um, YESTERDAY

Penny, the "contract" is the top ten items from a long-running poll of small-government initiatives suggested on a Tea Party website. The ideas aren't new ones; the only new thing is picking those particular ten items.

I'm not necessarily advocating a moon base. I agree with the good reasons not to have one. I was even going to add the gravity well issue because it certainly does add to the cost of operations.

One positive for a moon base, however, over orbital or Lagrange located stations is that you couldn't shoot it down. Something buried could be "hardened", which may be desirable. And lunar material could be used as radiation shielding.

We also might not want that territory occupied by someone else.

I think that maybe what we really ought to do is set up on Phobos or Deimos. I think we really ought to figure out how to go Out There and stay, even if it's not practical.

At this rate, it wouldn't surprise me if he became "Justin Lewis, formerly of Gordon & Rees". Not only did he (or whoever that was in the photos) come across as less than honest (IMHO, and not a good thing for an attorney, unless he has gone into politics), but he also comes across as dumb and easily duped (again, IMHO).

Of course, this all assumes that it was indeed Justin Lewis of Gordon & Rees who was in all those photographs carrying that sign that said "Faked the Moon Landing" and that he does not indeed believe that to be true (which might be problematic on the IQ side, but would, at least, be honest). And, from his bio, he probably isn't that dumb, naive, or gullible.

Let me note that I have no first hand knowledge of this matter or the people involved, and that the above was an opinion based solely on the cited blog post and information on the Gordon & Rees web site.

I find it interesting to read about the contrast between Tea Party protests and leftish ones. It seems to ignore the thousands in many countries who protested the illegal war in iraq ( of course so did the media for the most part) that were made up of mainly older middle class folks, just like the TP and conducted in a reasonable manner--just like the TP. And I do wonder where all these hippies are as I myself have not spotted one since I did my graduate work at Middlebury College in Vermont years ago.

The majority of the posters are saying in pretty transparent way that Tea Partiers are stupid. Does it really goes for humor these days?

However, the only point that matters these kids made after all is that Tea Party protests are neither violent, nor aggressive, which is directly opposite to what the MSM and Obama people are trying to convince the public. This actually does make the counter-protesters stupid, because this is not the point they are there to prove.

Also there are plenty of records of leftists violently confronting even people that come to ask uncomfortable questions, or standing separately with the posters the commissars do not approve. Compared to that Tea Partiers are pussycats

I agree with Synova vis-a-vis Revenant (except for the part about Phobos and Deimos), and would add that not only could a base on the Moon be hardened and hidden, whereas one anywhere in orbit could simply be blown up, but there's an enormous amount of raw materials in the Moon (which has an area the size of Asia) including metals, oxygen, and (we now know) a great deal of water, that can be used in constructing defenses, weapons, rocket fuel, living quarters and living on. Not only that but the Moon's gravity well is quite shallow, and since the body is airless, can be surmounted by mere electric catapults — no big rockets required.